Mega Thread The Western Bulldogs - The Sack Macca saga

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
the dog's kennel said:
I should point out one other thing wrt this being a huge year for Macca.

The last team I can remember completely cleaning out and rebounding was St Kilda in 2000. Plenty have cleaned out and then stunk it up since. But if we are on the right track we should follow a similar-ish path that they did (and yes, I understand the differences with GWS and GC etc. But on the other hand St Kilda COMPLETELY cleaned out, and they ended up far lower than we have. So it should balance out to an extent.)

Their 1999 was like our 2011. They were 11th and falling. Then it was wooden spoon city. In 2002 they were still stinking it up. That is our 2014. But in 2003 they won 11 matches and in 2004 they were PFists. So following that trend it would not be unreasonable to expect some rebounding next year.

I think until now most people would consider our list less of a wasteland than St Kilda in the early 2000s. That could change next year.

Let's hope we see the rebound!
Click to expand...

How would it balance out that they ended up lower so we should be better off for not going as low? Going lower gets you a better player (as long as your not Melbourne). In 2000 when they spooned it they got Riewoldt with the number 1 pick who was the core of their rebuild.
 
threenewpadlocks said:
However, even if you don't believe he regressed or stagnated, there's no denying his rate of improvement between 2013 and 14 was significantly less than his rate of improvement between 2012 and 13.
Click to expand...

Remember only two seasons ago Griffen went through a similar patch and had problems shaking tags
 
doggies ftw said:
Cant wait til we have a bit of a jump up the ladder next year (nothing serious, 10-11 wins) and you can all bow down to my superior knowledge. Oh and Reid kicks 35+ at CHF.
Click to expand...
If the last bit happens I'll buy you a beer or beverage of choice at the VFL grand final when we go back to back.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

ivan rassmussen said:
I'm at a desk right now, but it is not near WO - in the Docklands actually, but nowhere near either Nathan or Peter Gordon, as far as I am aware.

Do you really believe anything, I mean anything, Barrett says?
Click to expand...

It's a long off season and it's only day 3 - about another 120 odd days to fill in on this thread yet
 
fronkalicious said:
2013 - Libba not tagged
2014 - Libba tagged

2013 - Libba doesn't win B&F
2014 - Libba does win B&F

2013 - Libba doesn't make all Australian squad
2014 - Libba does make all Australian squad.
Click to expand...

I'll add

2013 - Ruckman tapping the ball to Libba was All Australian
2014 - Ruckman tapping the ball to Libba was dropped near the end of season
 
I can't believe that the length of that post people are picking out one statement among many that I made. If you're going to address one thing, why not address it all?

threenewpadlocks said:
I've completely changed my mind again. It wasn't a mistake to hire him, and the reason what he did in 2012 in terms of reshaping the list I can understand but I don't necessarily agree with them. Anyway, moving on, here are my reasons:

He simply isn't a very good coach when you're looking at the definition of a coach in its purest definition. That means team selection (which has been woeful), team style, match day tactics. I can give multiple, multiple examples of all three, both with my eye and statistics, which prove all three.

Even if you believe that he needs to implement his own "style", and that it can inevitably become successful, it's taking too long and we're going to be playing catchup against other teams. Two clubs with first year coaches, GWS and Brisbane, who both beat us when they were not favourites before the game, and finished below us on the ladder, improved through 2014 enough to the point that if you were to run power rankings right now, I'd say almost everybody would have us as the third worst team in the league, only ahead of St. Kilda and Melbourne. Again, I can elaborate and compare if people want me to. Those two teams, especially Brisbane, improved in half a season to the point that they're now better than us, after starting the season worse than us.

You might say that's fine as long as there's not discontent, and players are still with the coach, but irrespective of what you actually believe their impact on footballing alone and their ability as players, and the impact on developing the list, players wanting to leave shows signs that the coach doesn't have control of all the players. And that's just talking about the players that have left, they don't get on with the coach, I'm sure there's others still playing. You might be saying that it's for their own good, they're soft players not contributing, but where's the balance? Good coaches have everybody, or at least not multiple people upset and leaving, as well as doing all the things that people claim he's doing by getting rid of soft/weak/non-contributing players (not that I agree with that)

He's had three years. Not one, not two like Rhode, not two like Watters, he's had three years to change the list, implement game styles that he wants, and he's still historically unsuccessful like coaches like them, three bottom-5 finishes in the three years that he's been coach. He's had three years to do what he wants and we're still a bad team. Paint it any way you like, we won 7 games out of 22 this last season, and lost games to GWS, 2 of the 7 wins were to a team that finished below us by a single goal each time, etc.

Talented young players, which were drafted by the recruiting team and he can't be directly responsible for, paper over the cracks. They'll play well, merely because they're brilliant young players, in spite of all of the problems I'm listing, and make him appear a better coach than he actually is. Our season looks a lot worse if you don't draft Bontempelli, you draft Aish or Scharenberg instead, and hypothetically speaking we don't win that game against Melbourne if we did, because we didn't draft a superstar first rounder who kicks two brilliant goals that hardly another player in the AFL could have kicked both of, including goal of the year, which wasn't because of the coaching, but just his sheer individual brilliance. Ergo with Stringer against St. Kilda, etc. etc.

Whilst I don't necessarily agree completely with this next point I'm making, I'm making it to play devil's advocate and give further points, calling him a good development coach and then pointing toward our young players as conformation bias, and you're justifying a good aspect of coaching in an area where it's not his responsibility and past success as a development man at other clubs. Few points I can make on this.
  • You can't directly attribute the brilliance of some of our young players to his development, because we can't be certain that they'd develop elsewhere. Stringer, Macrae, Libba, Dahl, Bonts, could possibly have been good elsewhere
  • For every player that's improved, there's an equal amount that's gone backward.
    • Wallis has gone backward since 2012 under his "development"
    • Talia has gone backward since 2013 under his "development"
    • Hunter had a poorer 2014 than 2013 and thus has gone backward under his "development"
    • Jones has gone backward since 2011 under his "development"
    • Liberatore did not develop from 2014 since 2013, arguably he had a poorer year. People may argue this point and attribute it to closer opposition attention, the increase in opposition attention wasn't significant enough to the point that going backwards was understandable
  • Not to mention players he brought in, Young, Goodes, Lower, all off the list.
Not to mention the many, many other valid points that many have made (and instantly get howled down because of the pro-Macca groupthink that has developed), such as Geelong not believing his was suited to becoming a senior coach, looking at the W/L record, etc. etc.

Yes I accept that he needed to rebuild the list. No, I don't disagree that he was the wrong choice at the time. But the fact of the matter he's had three, coming up now four offseasons to do what he wants. The last two years, there have not be significant injuries to the point you can say we're among the 5 or 10 clubs with the worst injury lists in the season. He's had 66 games, and 3 now coming up 4 offseasons to prove himself as a coach, and I just don't see how you can overlook these many, many faults that I have just listed. If it was one, two years as coach I could accept it. But three years as a senior coach, three offseasons to build a list, three preseasons to teach players your styles and implement what you want to do, and 66 games to prove yourself as a tactical coach, and none of it sticks out.

I just don't see how you can overlook all of these points I have made.
Click to expand...
 
threenewpadlocks said:
I've completely changed my mind again. It wasn't a mistake to hire him, and the reason what he did in 2012 in terms of reshaping the list I can understand but I don't necessarily agree with them. Anyway, moving on, here are my reasons:

He simply isn't a very good coach when you're looking at the definition of a coach in its purest definition. That means team selection (which has been woeful), team style, match day tactics. I can give multiple, multiple examples of all three, both with my eye and statistics, which prove all three.
Click to expand...

A good post deserves a good reply, but unfortunately you'll have to make do with mine until someone decent arrives... :p:p

I have significant concerns over match day selection, as do most fans to be honest. But there are a couple of things to be considered here. One - Macca isn't the only voice on the selection panel. So when you assess further below that he shouldn't get direct credit for recruitment, he shouldnt get sole blame for all selection decisions. He also is on record, and people like Wayne Carey agree with this strategy, that he has spent considerable time early on assessing the character and capabilities of the players - so he's deliberately given some people harder roles and left people in positions - even when they were being beaten - to see what they were made of. Personally I think he's taken too long to assess the list, but that doesn't mean the method is incorrect.

threenewpadlocks said:
Even if you believe that he needs to implement his own "style", and that it can inevitably become successful, it's taking too long and we're going to be playing catchup against other teams. Two clubs with first year coaches, GWS and Brisbane, who both beat us when they were not favourites before the game, and finished below us on the ladder, improved through 2014 enough to the point that if you were to run power rankings right now, I'd say almost everybody would have us as the third worst team in the league, only ahead of St. Kilda and Melbourne. Again, I can elaborate and compare if people want me to. Those two teams, especially Brisbane, improved in half a season to the point that they're now better than us, after starting the season worse than us.
Click to expand...

Brisbane finished considerably higher than us last year, in fact were only a straight kick away in 2 games from playing finals. Sure, they had injury concerns which led to an overstatement that they were in crisis, but they recruited well and improved as players adapted. Interestingly, they had 6 picks in the top 36 - all of which were used to good effect. Might be a good year for us too with a few fringe players leaving.

Last year we were tipped to finish last and didn't. This year we were tipped to rise and didn't. Personally while we havent won as often as I'd like, we're probably close to where I expected us to finish - in terms of wins in the past few years.

threenewpadlocks said:
You might say that's fine as long as there's not discontent, and players are still with the coach, but irrespective of what you actually believe their impact on footballing alone and their ability as players, and the impact on developing the list, players wanting to leave shows signs that the coach doesn't have control of all the players. And that's just talking about the players that have left, they don't get on with the coach, I'm sure there's others still playing. You might be saying that it's for their own good, they're soft players not contributing, but where's the balance? Good coaches have everybody, or at least not multiple people upset and leaving, as well as doing all the things that people claim he's doing by getting rid of soft/weak/non-contributing players (not that I agree with that)
Click to expand...

No coach has control of all the players. Just look around at the off season carnage - Sanderson, McKenna gone. Waite has left Carlton, Beams and Lumumba have left the Pies. Players are leaving GWS in droves - mostly first round picks they have mismanaged. God knows what the real story is at Essendon. This is an era of player empowerment - they have the ability to move whenever (or close to) they like - we're not alone here. A lot of people don't necessarily like their boss. One of the early rules of management I learnt was not to think you know everything and completely change all the rules the minute you take charge. Macca has actually done this. He's assessed the list, worked out what he likes and doesn't and is introducing systems and standards that everyone has to follow. I like this. But, it will make some people upset. Guaranteed.

threenewpadlocks said:
He's had three years. Not one, not two like Rhode, not two like Watters, he's had three years to change the list, implement game styles that he wants, and he's still historically unsuccessful like coaches like them, three bottom-5 finishes in the three years that he's been coach. He's had three years to do what he wants and we're still a bad team. Paint it any way you like, we won 7 games out of 22 this last season, and lost games to GWS, 2 of the 7 wins were to a team that finished below us by a single goal each time, etc.
Click to expand...

Eventually everyone is going to lose to GWS and GCS. Was I bloody annoyed that we lost to GWS in one of the few games I can get to each year - yep. I think I was still annoyed many days after in the autopsy thread. But we lost to GCS last year and beat them this year. We also beat the Pies and Richmond - games we weren't expected to - just like we won games last year we weren't expected to. He's also had a hand in the establishment of the successful VFL side, which is playing to the style and standard we want to in the AFL. Hopefully this can flow into the AFL side. Was I frustrated that we didn't get much guidance on why players were stuck in the 2's - yep - this is one of his major shortcomings. Can I accept the explanations that have trickled out ? Yep, but I'll want to see evidence of improvement soon.

threenewpadlocks said:
Talented young players, which were drafted by the recruiting team and he can't be directly responsible for, paper over the cracks. They'll play well, merely because they're brilliant young players, in spite of all of the problems I'm listing, and make him appear a better coach than he actually is. Our season looks a lot worse if you don't draft Bontempelli, you draft Aish or Scharenberg instead, and hypothetically speaking we don't win that game against Melbourne if we did, because we didn't draft a superstar first rounder who kicks two brilliant goals that hardly another player in the AFL could have kicked both of, including goal of the year, which wasn't because of the coaching, but just his sheer individual brilliance. Ergo with Stringer against St. Kilda, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

Stringer was performing sporadically in the first half of this year, was sent back to the 2's to work on a few things - came back playing like a superstar - but this is purely due to him, not Macca's man management or assessment/development of him ?? I think you are being unrealistic and unfair here. We've seen Macca make players like Stringer, Macrae and Bontempelli play in a variety of roles and are benefitting significantly from this.

And in terms of recruitment - the club clearly has a plan. I suspect that the coach plays a part in the development of this plan.

threenewpadlocks said:
Whilst I don't necessarily agree completely with this next point I'm making, I'm making it to play devil's advocate and give further points, calling him a good development coach and then pointing toward our young players as conformation bias, and you're justifying a good aspect of coaching in an area where it's not his responsibility and past success as a development man at other clubs. Few points I can make on this.

You can't directly attribute the brilliance of some of our young players to his development, because we can't be certain that they'd develop elsewhere. Stringer, Macrae, Libba, Dahl, Bonts, could possibly have been good elsewhere
  • For every player that's improved, there's an equal amount that's gone backward.
    • Wallis has gone backward since 2012 under his "development"
    • Talia has gone backward since 2013 under his "development"
    • Hunter had a poorer 2014 than 2013 and thus has gone backward under his "development"
    • Jones has gone backward since 2011 under his "development"
    • Liberatore did not develop from 2014 since 2013, arguably he had a poorer year. People may argue this point and attribute it to closer opposition attention, the increase in opposition attention wasn't significant enough to the point that going backwards was understandable
  • Not to mention players he brought in, Young, Goodes, Lower, all off the list.
Click to expand...
The first point cannot be proven one way or the other, unless you have a spare parallel universe. If you do, can I borrow it - as I need to test something with Scarlett Johansson ?

I find you second set of points a little contradictory. The rapid rise of Stringer, Bontempelli and Macrae is due to them being superstars - and outside the normal development rules - but the second group - containing mortals - is also expected to have a continual upward rise ?? This doesn't happen. All kids form fluctuates. For example, Wallis was dropped and came back and was brilliant until he got injured. We beat Essendon if he stays on. This is part of management - and combined with the development of others - is something I think we are doing well..

FWIW, I think Libbas output was pretty consistent compared to last year, all things considered. But you have been beaten around the head a little unfairly here already.

The last point I also disagree with. Lower, Goodes and Young were all cheap options - designed to lend some size and strength if needed to protect the kids. They cost peanuts and delivered a mixed bag - actually highlighting (IMO) the benefits of the draft. We've seen GWS and GCS struggle with the kids only approach - so I have no issues here.

I agree with anyone that says we haven't turned the list over fast enough, but perhaps we had to wait for the era of compromised drafts to end ?

threenewpadlocks said:
Not to mention the many, many other valid points that many have made (and instantly get howled down because of the pro-Macca groupthink that has developed), such as Geelong not believing his was suited to becoming a senior coach, looking at the W/L record, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

Essendon thought Hird would be a great idea. Vossy was a genius..... It took Malthouse 6 or 7 years to rebuild Collingwood in between the losses to Brisbane and their latest flag - can you see where I'm going here ?. I don't see how an assessment of Macca by another club 4 or 5 years ago, is relevant to the discussion now. People don't change or improve their skills over time ? Because you seem to be implying that all players should improve all the time, but coaches should be judged on something that happened in the past. I'm being deliberately silly here, but hopefully you can see why.

threenewpadlocks said:
Yes I accept that he needed to rebuild the list. No, I don't disagree that he was the wrong choice at the time. But the fact of the matter he's had three, coming up now four offseasons to do what he wants. The last two years, there have not be significant injuries to the point you can say we're among the 5 or 10 clubs with the worst injury lists in the season. He's had 66 games, and 3 now coming up 4 offseasons to prove himself as a coach, and I just don't see how you can overlook these many, many faults that I have just listed. If it was one, two years as coach I could accept it. But three years as a senior coach, three offseasons to build a list, three preseasons to teach players your styles and implement what you want to do, and 66 games to prove yourself as a tactical coach, and none of it sticks out.

I just don't see how you can overlook all of these points I have made.
Click to expand...

I'm still skeptical. Believe me I am. But I also try to look past the noise and see the long term trend - which for me is upwards.

But I could be wrong....
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TedDougChris said:
A good post deserves a good reply, but unfortunately you'll have to make do with mine until someone decent arrives... :p:p

I have significant concerns over match day selection, as do most fans to be honest. But there are a couple of things to be considered here. One - Macca isn't the only voice on the selection panel. So when you assess further below that he shouldn't get direct credit for recruitment, he shouldnt get sole blame for all selection decisions. He also is on record, and people like Wayne Carey agree with this strategy, that he has spent considerable time early on assessing the character and capabilities of the players - so he's deliberately given some people harder roles and left people in positions - even when they were being beaten - to see what they were made of. Personally I think he's taken too long to assess the list, but that doesn't mean the method is incorrect.



Brisbane finished considerably higher than us last year, in fact were only a straight kick away in 2 games from playing finals. Sure, they had injury concerns which led to an overstatement that they were in crisis, but they recruited well and improved as players adapted. Interestingly, they had 6 picks in the top 36 - all of which were used to good effect. Might be a good year for us too with a few fringe players leaving.

Last year we were tipped to finish last and didn't. This year we were tipped to rise and didn't. Personally while we havent won as often as I'd like, we're probably close to where I expected us to finish - in terms of wins in the past few years.



No coach has control of all the players. Just look around at the off season carnage - Sanderson, McKenna gone. Waite has left Carlton, Beams and Lumumba have left the Pies. Players are leaving GWS in droves - mostly first round picks they have mismanaged. God knows what the real story is at Essendon. This is an era of player empowerment - they have the ability to move whenever (or close to) they like - we're not alone here. A lot of people don't necessarily like their boss. One of the early rules of management I learnt was not to think you know everything and completely change all the rules the minute you take charge. Macca has actually done this. He's assessed the list, worked out what he likes and doesn't and is introducing systems and standards that everyone has to follow. I like this. But, it will make some people upset. Guaranteed.



Eventually everyone is going to lose to GWS and GCS. Was I bloody annoyed that we lost to GWS in one of the few games I can get to each year - yep. I think I was still annoyed many days after in the autopsy thread. But we lost to GCS last year and beat them this year. We also beat the Pies and Richmond - games we weren't expected to - just like we won games last year we weren't expected to. He's also had a hand in the establishment of the successful VFL side, which is playing to the style and standard we want to in the AFL. Hopefully this can flow into the AFL side. Was I frustrated that we didn't get much guidance on why players were stuck in the 2's - yep - this is one of his major shortcomings. Can I accept the explanations that have trickled out ? Yep, but I'll want to see evidence of improvement soon.



Stringer was performing sporadically in the first half of this year, was sent back to the 2's to work on a few things - came back playing like a superstar - but this is purely due to him, not Macca's man management or assessment/development of him ?? I think you are being unrealistic and unfair here. We've seen Macca make players like Stringer, Macrae and Bontempelli play in a variety of roles and are benefitting significantly from this.

And in terms of recruitment - the club clearly has a plan. I suspect that the coach plays a part in the development of this plan.


The first point cannot be proven one way or the other, unless you have a spare parallel universe. If you do, can I borrow it - as I need to test something with Scarlett Johansson ?

I find you second set of points a little contradictory. The rapid rise of Stringer, Bontempelli and Macrae is due to them being superstars - and outside the normal development rules - but the second group - containing mortals - is also expected to have a continual upward rise ?? This doesn't happen. All kids form fluctuates. For example, Wallis was dropped and came back and was brilliant until he got injured. We beat Essendon if he stays on. This is part of management - and combined with the development of others - is something I think we are doing well..

FWIW, I think Libbas output was pretty consistent compared to last year, all things considered. But you have been beaten around the head a little unfairly here already.

The last point I also disagree with. Lower, Goodes and Young were all cheap options - designed to lend some size and strength if needed to protect the kids. They cost peanuts and delivered a mixed bag - actually highlighting (IMO) the benefits of the draft. We've seen GWS and GCS struggle with the kids only approach - so I have no issues here.

I agree with anyone that says we haven't turned the list over fast enough, but perhaps we had to wait for the era of compromised drafts to end ?



Essendon thought Hird would be a great idea. Vossy was a genius..... It took Malthouse 6 or 7 years to rebuild Collingwood in between the losses to Brisbane and their latest flag - can you see where I'm going here ?. I don't see how an assessment of Macca by another club 4 or 5 years ago, is relevant to the discussion now. People don't change or improve their skills over time ? Because you seem to be implying that all players should improve all the time, but coaches should be judged on something that happened in the past. I'm being deliberately silly here, but hopefully you can see why.



I'm still skeptical. Believe me I am. But I also try to look past the noise and see the long term trend - which for me is upwards.

But I could be wrong....
Click to expand...

Excellent post
 
Toastman said:
How would it balance out that they ended up lower so we should be better off for not going as low? Going lower gets you a better player (as long as your not Melbourne). In 2000 when they spooned it they got Riewoldt with the number 1 pick who was the core of their rebuild.
Click to expand...

My logic was we bottomed out enough to get gun draft picks, but didn't bottom out enough to lose almost all our experience at once and forget completely how to win. If you're better off winning 3 games and getting pick 2 then winning 8 games and getting pick 5, then why aren't we tanking? I think there is a value in retaining your club's self-respect and competitive edge. And that value is worth more than the difference between pick 1 and 5.
 
When I suggest trading will Minson I backed it up with how I'd go about it, why and who I'd target to replace him.

But here I see a lot of people saying that we should sack macca but not really giving any other options at who should replace him and why.

It's easy to say sack the coach but you need a replacement plan
 
The one thing I don't get from 'supporters' of this club is the vitriol towards Macca. For that matter in various parts of this thread Eade and Wallace.

You can disagree with aspects of his coaching, but do any of you really think he and his team and not putting their heart and soul into making this club a better place? If he is not up to it, it's fine for the keyboard warriors to denigrate him personally?

I have doubts which I have noted. But they are about his coaching not him the person nor make out issues I disagree with about his coaching and man management are a port reflection of him.

Three players who clearly had little future at the club are leaving. 3 more delisted and 2 retired. Apparant lay that constitutes a crises that makes Macca the devil incarnate. Seriously, it is year end list management and those who got the news of limited contracts or limited time, do you really think they would be happy?

The same goes for the players leaving to, vitriol as if they owe us something. They would believe they gave everything they got. This is their workplace and of they feel they need to move on, so be it. The way some, posters carry on it is like there is some sort of master servant relationship percular to professional sport.

I see where good posters on either side of the argument are getting into personal squabbles. This thread is actually a good valuable thread for supporters of the club the discuss and debate genuine or perceived concerns with the coach. It does not need to generate into the childish nanana I am right you are wrong or one liners with no substance that really just come accross as a troll.

Both sides of the argument consider that when you post on this board you are a reflection of the Footscray football club(trading as.........). Different opinions are just that, if you put the, out there be prepared to debate or discuss, I have had some great debates or discussions with some of the anti Maccas, Black pup, MD, threenewpadlocks to name a few.

Apologies to anyone who takes offence to this post. Supporters of this great club are diverse with diverse opinions. I just would like to think our board is the best on big footy as dispute our difference of opinions we love our club amd show a degree of respect for those working their butts off to make this a successful and great club
 
threenewpadlocks said:
The timeframe I'm using obviously is a poor metric, but it's very simplistic as it looks at the first year that a coach is coaching, and irrespective of the W/L record before hand a new coach has a new style and implements things that he wants into a club.
Click to expand...

So why use it then? It's not that hard to consider the teams history before the coach arrived, just like Lachy has done.

You do have some valid points though.
 
I honestly believe that this year is make or break for McCartney, he was never going to be sacked this season but with a year to run at the end of next season it is a lot more likely unless we show improvement, if we have another season like this year then he will be on thin ice and fair or not the media will be all over him and his future.

Selection this season has been woeful almost every single week, yes the assistants are to blame as well and to be honest i do not rate a lot of our assistant coaches the pick of the bunch seems to be joel corey who all our young mids speak extremely highly of. But with the selection the senior coach must have the final say and he listens to all the opinions of his assistants but he is the one paid to make the decisions and whether fair or not the buck stops with the coach.

Drafting and recruitment has been extremely good since McCartney arrived and yes the recruiters do a great job finding the talent and advising who they see as best available but again McCartney would have final say on who he wants in the club.

We can throw all the pros and cons about McCartney around and talk about how good or poor he has been in areas but at the end of the day this industry is a results driven industry, next season i believe we need to be pushing for finals not necessarily be in the 8 at any stage but be a chance for the majority of the season if at the end of next season we bottom 5 or 6 with same or less wins than this season then I would expect the club to look elsewhere seasons of 5, 8 and 7 wins so far under McCartney yes we have been rebuilding but this coming season if we have another similar year then it will be time for the club to make the call.
 
read between the lines every player the dogs have asked about to come we have been rejected why? Players want out? Why there's a problem it's happening there's a board meeting today what is worse mark Thompson has even payed out the Bulldogs not that it matters but something is going on and something has to give
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

stefoid
western bulldogs fringe festival
Replies
18
Views
1K
Freshwater
Freshwater
BulldogMuscle
Autopsy Western Bulldogs 2023 season review
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
172
Views
13K
Dogs_r_barking
Dogs_r_barking
Testekill
Welcome to the Bulldogs Lachlan Bramble
2 3 4 5
Replies
104
Views
9K
Dogs_R_Us
Dogs_R_Us
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Lachlan Smith
2 3
Replies
61
Views
6K
House_of_Dahl
House_of_Dahl
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Aiden O’Driscoll
2 3
Replies
69
Views
7K
ossie_21
ossie_21
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Joel Freijah
2 3 4 5
Replies
109
Views
11K
dergert
dergert
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Jordan Croft
2 3
Replies
65
Views
5K
DiamondDogs8
DiamondDogs8

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top